Page 3208 - Week 10 - Thursday, 18 October 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
(3) Did someone on behalf of the Territory, before making the order, ensure that the planning approval granted on 29 July 1998 pursuant to section 230 or 245 of the Land Act for plans 26446 D, E and F which had already been approved on 28 May 1978 under the Buildings (Design and Siting) Ordinance 1964 for the ongoing building work, was lawfully re-approved under the Land Act;
(4) What section of the Land Act provided for such a re-approval;
(5) Did someone on behalf of Planning and Land Management (PALM)/ACT Planning and Land Authority (ACTPLA) on 22, 23 or 29 July 1998 provide the applicants with an itemised account of actual fees paid (not just an estimate of costs) in relation to the application and re-approval of plans 26446 D, E and F under the Land Act and/or the Building Act 1972 (the Building Act);
(6) Did someone on behalf of PALM/ACTPLA provide the applicants with Application Acknowledgement forms as completed by PALM/ACTPLA pursuant to the Building Act for plans 26446 D, E and F and plan 983370/A on 22 July 1998;
(7) Did someone on behalf of PALM/ACTPLA on 22 July 1998 or at any other time provide the applicants with proof of any fees paid for the re-approval of plans 26446 D, E and F plus amendments under the Land Act;
(8) Did someone on behalf of PALM/ACTPLA provide the applicants with proof of fees paid for the re-approval of plan 983370/A as specified in the Application Acknowledgement Form under the Building Act;
(9) Will the Minister supply a certified true copy of plan 983370/A re-approved pursuant to section 230 or 245 of the Land Act granted on 29 July 1998;
(10) Will the Minister provide the respective forms each entitled Approval of Residential Construction for plans endorsed respectively 26446 D, E and F and 983370/A, as approved pursuant to the Building Act on 29 July 1998;
(11) Did someone on behalf of PALM/ACTPLA on or before 20 December 2002, or at any other time, validate the re-approval of plans 26446 D, E and F granted pursuant to section 230 or 245 of the Land Act included in the T-document AT 03/05 and the decision AT32 (30 June 2003) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal proceedings and the Appeal Book SCA 46/2004 and judgment ACTSC84 (17 August 2004) of the Supreme Court Appeal proceedings and the endorsement of planning approvals of plans 26446 D, E and F and plan 983370/A as documented on the Conveyancing Inquiry Form available to the public;
(12) Was the failure of ACTPLA officers to reply to a written request from the lessees before 5 March 2005 for an extension of time to complete the building work by that date as set out in the order until the reply of 27 July 2005 a consequence of the possible invalid planning approval granted by PALM on 29 July 1998 and was incapable of ongoing enforcement of the order under section 256 of the Land Act;
(13) Were the subsequent actions on the part of PALM/ACTPLA justified in light of the failure of ACTPLA to advise the lessees and the courts as to the validity of the re-approval of plans 26446 D, E and F and plans 983370/A under section 230 or 245 of the Land Act in making a section 256 order against the lessees;
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .